• Commonwealth v. Tillery

    Publication Date: 2021-04-12
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stabile
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0395

    Where the vehicle code did not require use of a turn signal when moving from a traffic lane to a parking spot, police lacked probable cause to initiate a traffic stop, requiring suppression of evidence recovered during the stop. Order of the trial court affirmed.

  • Shaffer v. Pennsbury Sch. Dist.

    Publication Date: 2021-03-29
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry: Education
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge McHugh
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0341

    Plaintiff moved to compel production of redacted portions of a deposition in another case and court found that when a witness was repeatedly allowed to reveal privileged information in response to questions posed by counsel for holder of the privilege, counsel failed to take "reasonable steps to prevent disclosure" as required by rule 502(b)(3) and the privilege was waived. Motion granted in part.

  • Commonwealth v. Hudson-Greenly

    Publication Date: 2021-03-08
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0244

    The trial court properly allowed the minor victim to testify by a contemporaneous alternative method where the victim's testimony, coupled with the trial court's observations, supported a finding that defendant's presence would have caused the victim serious emotional distress and impaired her ability to communicate in the courtroom. The superior court affirmed.

  • Commonwealth v. Williams

    Publication Date: 2021-02-08
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Lazarus
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0128

    The trial court erred in barring defendant from calling a witness to impeach a commonwealth witnesses' previously-admitted hearsay statement; however, the error was harmless as the evidence of defendant's guilt was overwhelming by comparison to the error such that it could not have contributed to the guilty verdict. The superior court affirmed defendant's conviction.

  • Hand v. DiMauro

    Publication Date: 2021-02-01
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry: Transportation
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County
    Judge: Judge Nealon
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0022

    Even assuming arguendo that plaintiff's liability expert's opinion involving the "rule of three" as applied to commercial drivers could be deemed novel science, the expert's opinions were sufficiently supported by the evidence of record, including empirical studies and industry research. The court denied defendants' motion to exclude.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Florida Evidence and Procedure 2019

    Authors: Patrick S. Montoya, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Adams v. Rising Sun Med. Ctr.

    Publication Date: 2021-01-11
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Bowes
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-0002

    The trial court committed reversible error in precluding plaintiff from offering evidence of decedent's statements to medical personnel about her symptoms and family medical history, as such testimony was admissible under the medical treatment hearsay exception in Pa.R.Evid. 803(4), which does not require testimony from a health care provider. The superior court granted plaintiff a new trial.

  • William Penn Sch. Dist. v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Educ.

    Publication Date: 2020-12-07
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry: Education | State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Cohn Jubelirer
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-1336

    Speaker of the house of representatives and chairman of the house of representatives appropriations committee sought protective orders to prevent petitioners from taking their depositions and court found they could not be required to appear for oral deposition but petitioners could serve written discovery requests. Motion granted in part.

  • Commonwealth v. Kennedy

    Publication Date: 2020-11-23
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-1175

    The assistant district attorney prosecuting this case against defendant was permitted to authorize one-party consensual interception of a witness's telephone conversations with defendant and employed a meticulous procedure to ensure that the teenage witness voluntarily provided her consent to the interceptions. The court denied in part defendant's omnibus pretrial motion to suppress.

  • Loomis v. Bomba

    Publication Date: 2020-11-02
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County
    Judge: Judge Nealon
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-1120

    The court allowed plaintiffs to offer the lay testimony of a witness regarding the speed of a boat involved in an accident under Pennsylvania Rule of Evidence 701, which allows a lay witness to offer opinion testimony that is rationally based on that witness's perception, helpful to understanding the witness's testimony and not based on scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge. The court denied in part defendants' motion in limine.

  • Nothstein v. USA Cycling

    Publication Date: 2020-11-02
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Smith
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-1193

    Motion judge properly denied plaintiff's motion to compel the production of names of alleged reporters and victims of sexual abuse because a protective order was appropriate due to the highly sensitive nature of the identities of reporters and alleged victims but erred in allowing the claw-back of a name inadvertently revealed during discovery because the name was not privileged material. Order vacated in part and sustained in part.